Inteligent Design in itself had a "designer" and I think it would be valid to say that the origins can be traced back to the endearing philosopher, William Paley.

Born in 1743 (England) Paley grew up Anglican, and trained for the priesthood. Paleys most memorable (and greatest work) book was Natural Theology: Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Designer. His famous quote from this book (which one can trace to the ID movement today) is:

. . when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive. . that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose, e.g. that they are so formed and adjusted as to produce motion, and that motion so regulated as to point out the hour of the day; that if the different parts had been differently shaped from what they are, or placed after any other manner or in any other order than that in which they are placed, either no motion at all would have been carried on in the machine, or none which would have answered the use that is now served by it.. the inference we think is inevitable, that the watch must have had a maker - that there must have existed, at some time and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer, who comprehended its construction and designed its use.. The marks of design are too strong to be got over. Design must have had a designer. That designer must have been a person. That person is God.

Yep, so boring that one can find the basic arguments of the ID movement in Paley's book. IC, SC, a version of the anthropic principle, and even the "privileged planet" conjecture are all derived from stuff that William Paley did.

So feel free to tell the ID advocates going on at length that they aren't less boring than the original.